What?? You've Got to Be Kidding Me with These Membership Numbers!

[jcousino]

Ok, what other side losses would there be? Sold camps and properties 

Loss of other jobs. Staff and camp personal

Even more loss to FOS due to the loss of local connections. 

Most likely a house of cards that is falling apart. I'm not sure if it can be reversed under the current system. 

 

 

[Eagle94-A1]

5 hours ago, jcousino said:

Ok, what other side losses would there be? Sold camps and properties 

Loss of other jobs. Staff and camp personal

Even more loss to FOS due to the loss of local connections. 

Most likely a house of cards that is falling apart. I'm not sure if it can be reversed under the current system. 

 

 

Friends of mine have been hit with "Unit Fair Share" fees from their council. Unit is being assessed a per scout fee.  This is being added to the charter fee, so not directly on the Scouts, but who pays unit dues. They are complaining of no services being provided by the council to warrant that  fee, or FOS for that matter.

[InquisitiveScouter]

18 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Friends of mine have been hit with "Unit Fair Share" fees from their council. Unit is being assessed a per scout fee.  This is being added to the charter fee, so not directly on the Scouts, but who pays unit dues. They are complaining of no services being provided by the council to warrant that  fee, or FOS for that matter.

Here are our costs for 2026:

2026 Unit Charter Fee - $100.00

-------------------------------------

2026 National Membership Fee - Youth  $85.00

2026 Council Service Fee - Youth  $75.00

2026 Troop Dues - $35.00

2026 Sibling Discount - $17.50

2026 One-time Equipment/Joining Fee - $35.00

---------------------------------------------

2026 National Fee - Adult  $65.00

2026 Council Insurance Fee - Adult  $6.00

So, cost to remain in the Troop for 2026 if you are already registered?  $85 + $75 + $35 = $195  (Don't forget to add on National's credit card fee, if you pay through my.scouting)

Cost to transfer/crossover to the Troop in say, March 2026 (because they already registered with their Pack)= ($35/12 * 9) + $35 = $61.25  {That's Troop dues pro-rated, and the Troop equipment fee.)

We used to pay these fees for the entire Troop from our bank account around 01 Dec thru the re-charter process.  We would then assess the costs to each Scout through Scoutbook to collect.  For several of our families, we would "carry" that debt for a few months until all the Christmas / New Years bills were paid.  If a Scout's balance goes over $200, we ask for some partial payment to bring it back below $200.

Troop has 44 Scouts currently.  Eight will not renew (Seven are turning 18 years old, and one is dropping out.)  Now, here we are on 15 Dec, and 25 out of 36 eligible Scouts do not have a renewed registration.  That's 69.4% whose parents have ignored the emails from National to renew.  (...and our one Troop reminder at the beginning of the month.) National sent emails on 01 Nov and 01 Dec.

Committee has not discussed what to do in the New Year with Scouts who have not renewed registrations.

[Eagledad]

Are the fees the same for Cubs? Young parents have many program choices during the Tiger and Wolf years, and costs drive many of their choices.

Barry

[Tron]

7 hours ago, jcousino said:

Ok, what other side losses would there be? Sold camps and properties 

Loss of other jobs. Staff and camp personal

Even more loss to FOS due to the loss of local connections. 

Most likely a house of cards that is falling apart. I'm not sure if it can be reversed under the current system. 

 

 

We have the infrastructure and paid staffing of 1970 when the program had 4 to 5 times the participation rate. I think we could increase participation but I don't think we're ever hitting the 1970 membership number. We could perhaps reduce some camps to primitive camping only and mothball them for brighter days; however, we just don't need the number of camps that we have. In my state we literally have double the number of resident camp slots each summer than there are scouts in the state; the councils are fighting each other for scouts, all of the camps are suffering. FOS is already dead in many councils, the constant money hustle has everyone burned out. We have to address the central office problem of scouting; too many chiefs, not enough indians, we need to consolidate councils to save the program. 

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Friends of mine have been hit with "Unit Fair Share" fees from their council. Unit is being assessed a per scout fee.  This is being added to the charter fee, so not directly on the Scouts, but who pays unit dues. They are complaining of no services being provided by the council to warrant that  fee, or FOS for that matter.

What exactly is a unit fair share fee? Is it different than a council fee somehow? 

55 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Here are our costs for 2026:

2026 Unit Charter Fee - $100.00

-------------------------------------

2026 National Membership Fee - Youth  $85.00

2026 Council Service Fee - Youth  $75.00

2026 Troop Dues - $35.00

2026 Sibling Discount - $17.50

2026 One-time Equipment/Joining Fee - $35.00

---------------------------------------------

2026 National Fee - Adult  $65.00

2026 Council Insurance Fee - Adult  $6.00

So, cost to remain in the Troop for 2026 if you are already registered?  $85 + $75 + $35 = $195  (Don't forget to add on National's credit card fee, if you pay through my.scouting)

Cost to transfer/crossover to the Troop in say, March 2026 (because they already registered with their Pack)= ($35/12 * 9) + $35 = $61.25  {That's Troop dues pro-rated, and the Troop equipment fee.)

We used to pay these fees for the entire Troop from our bank account around 01 Dec thru the re-charter process.  We would then assess the costs to each Scout through Scoutbook to collect.  For several of our families, we would "carry" that debt for a few months until all the Christmas / New Years bills were paid.  If a Scout's balance goes over $200, we ask for some partial payment to bring it back below $200.

Troop has 44 Scouts currently.  Eight will not renew (Seven are turning 18 years old, and one is dropping out.)  Now, here we are on 15 Dec, and 25 out of 36 eligible Scouts do not have a renewed registration.  That's 69.4% whose parents have ignored the emails from National to renew.  (...and our one Troop reminder at the beginning of the month.) National sent emails on 01 Nov and 01 Dec.

Committee has not discussed what to do in the New Year with Scouts who have not renewed registrations.

Costs are nothing in scouting. Literally nothing compared to everything else. We lose scouts every year to club sports (especially baseball). Parents in my area are ponying up literally thousands of dollars a year, sometimes every few weeks for cycle after 8 week cycle of club sports; mandatory attendance policies for parents in the bleachers and driving. Some sports are worse than others, the sports leagues are in league with the varsity coaches; my daughter is being told that "it is heavily recommended to play at least 3 seasons of club soccer at $800 a pop if she wants to retain her varsity slot"; my buddy is ponying up $3200 every 8 weeks for club volleyball to retain his daughters slot on the varsity team. I'm lucky that my daughters league(s) are all local, my buddy is being forced to go to regional events which takes him sometimes 3 states away as a mandatory driver, and then he has to fork over extra for hotel rooms. Club sports are growing exponentially; what are we doing wrong that club sports at their insane cost are growing and growing while we are retracting and retracting? 

1 minute ago, Eagledad said:

Are the fees the same for Cubs? Young parents have many program choices during the Tiger and Wolf years, and costs drive many of their choices.

Barry

As I started stating above, I don't think costs are driving their choices. I will channel my inner Stan Lee and ask the question "What If?"; what if the issue is results based and not cost based? I would make the argument that if we (as a program) had a guarantee that if a scout was truly active and attended X number of meetings and Y number of weekend campouts, and at least 1 resident camp a year that the scout would X ranks and Y merit badges in every 12 month period our recruitment would double and our retention would move into the 80% range. 

I was just looking at my troops roster due to renewals coming due for most of the troop in a few days. We have 6 scouts dropping for sure, no chance in hell of retaining them. 4 of them have no chance of making it to Eagle, 2 have been lost to club sports at age 12 and did not make Scout rank since crossing in March. We have another 10 potentially dropping; 1 made eagle and is moving on, the other 9 are all inactive due to club sports and are way off any reasonable pace of making eagle. This is going to be a tough hit and a big ego bruise for the SM if we really lose 14 scouts in 15 days; it's going to cast a shadow across the whole troop. 

[Eagledad]

5 minutes ago, Tron said:

 

As I started stating above, I don't think costs are driving their choices. I will channel my inner Stan Lee and ask the question "What If?"; what if the issue is results based and not cost based? I would make the argument that if we (as a program) had a guarantee that if a scout was truly active and attended X number of meetings and Y number of weekend campouts, and at least 1 resident camp a year that the scout would X ranks and Y merit badges in every 12 month period our recruitment would double and our retention would move into the 80% range. 

Putting on my Membership Chairman hat.

Almost 95% of scouts in troops come from the Cubs. If the youth aren't recruited in Cubs, the troops will have to recruit from other sources.

When National added additional requirements to the Tiger program in 2000 (increasing meetings to every week, an adult required for each scout), many units were unable to meet the new demands, and the Tiger numbers dropped significantly. That drop became obvious in 2005 when the troop membership suddenly dropped. 

If you don't get the Cubs, you don't get the crossovers.

Barry

[Eagledad]

23 minutes ago, Tron said:

As I started stating above, I don't think costs are driving their choices. I will channel my inner Stan Lee and ask the question "What If?"; what if the issue is results based and not cost based? I would make the argument that if we (as a program) had a guarantee that if a scout was truly active and attended X number of meetings and Y number of weekend campouts, and at least 1 resident camp a year that the scout would X ranks and Y merit badges in every 12 month period our recruitment would double and our retention would move into the 80% range.

Your idea isn't new; the BSA has made these kinds of promises since the creation of the program. I do agree that at this age, cost isn't as much of an issue as the cub program, but a results-based program is very subjective. And most of the time the adults go the easy route of Eagle for their results-based program. 

However, youth at this age aren't advancement-driven. I found that most Eagle-driven programs lose 70% of their scouts by age 15 because advancement gets boring. Adventure-driven programs thrive because they are fun in the outdoors, and because independence in the patrol method drives more maturity in their growth. Go look at units where scouts age out, and you will find they are more scout-run with adventure. Also, adventure-driven programs typically have a high number of Eagles because the scouts are in the program a long time and earn the Eagle requirements by simply participating.

Barry

[InquisitiveScouter]

1 hour ago, Tron said:

what are we doing wrong that club sports at their insane cost are growing and growing while we are retracting and retracting? 

We are not making participation mandatory for Scouts or parents.  In Scouting, there really isn't "skin in the game" unless you want to put it there.

 

40 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Go look at units where scouts age out, and you will find they are more scout-run with adventure. Also, adventure-driven programs typically have a high number of Eagles because the scouts are in the program a long time and earn the Eagle requirements by simply participating.

Yes, this is it.  When I had the reins of the Troop, we went camping every month, with two or three big events every summer... 50-miler backpacking trips, week-long beach adventures, 50-miler canoeing, 100+ mile cycling trips, etc.  Now that I have pulled back a lot from the Troop, there is no one who is willing to put that much effort into the program.  So, the numbers are dwindling.

Agree with you wholeheartedly... young men want adventure, not academics.

[Eagle94-A1]

@Tron, Since FOS has dried up, and only 1 unit in the district goes to the local summer camp, The "troop" is being charged $37.50 per Scout in addition to  $100 recharter fee. Next year it goes up to $75/Scout. That is in addition to the individual 's national registration fee, council service fee, and insurance fee. That is $120/Scout. So a family with 4 Scouts in the program costs $480 individual fees plus $150 for "Fair Share", plus unit dues. And that doesn't include camp outs and summer camps.

I know folks say scouting is cheap compared to sports, but there are a lot of folks who cannot afford to do sports, but could afford Scouting. Not any more. 

[Tron]

22 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Putting on my Membership Chairman hat.

Almost 95% of scouts in troops come from the Cubs. If the youth aren't recruited in Cubs, the troops will have to recruit from other sources.

When National added additional requirements to the Tiger program in 2000 (increasing meetings to every week, an adult required for each scout), many units were unable to meet the new demands, and the Tiger numbers dropped significantly. That drop became obvious in 2005 when the troop membership suddenly dropped. 

If you don't get the Cubs, you don't get the crossovers.

Barry

I get this, the numbers I have seen is 70% come from cubs but argument is solid. 

22 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Your idea isn't new; the BSA has made these kinds of promises since the creation of the program. I do agree that at this age, cost isn't as much of an issue as the cub program, but a results-based program is very subjective. And most of the time the adults go the easy route of Eagle for their results-based program. 

However, youth at this age aren't advancement-driven. I found that most Eagle-driven programs lose 70% of their scouts by age 15 because advancement gets boring. Adventure-driven programs thrive because they are fun in the outdoors, and because independence in the patrol method drives more maturity in their growth. Go look at units where scouts age out, and you will find they are more scout-run with adventure. Also, adventure-driven programs typically have a high number of Eagles because the scouts are in the program a long time and earn the Eagle requirements by simply participating.

Barry

What I am seeing is a pay-for-play type experience with the club sports. SInce the coaches are all in league with each other there are these play club and we guarantee so much play time here and then that translates to making the varsity team, etc ... 

What is our join scouting and we guarantee so much <insert what parents want here> ? 

21 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

We are not making participation mandatory for Scouts or parents.  In Scouting, there really isn't "skin in the game" unless you want to put it there.

 

Yes, this is it.  When I had the reins of the Troop, we went camping every month, with two or three big events every summer... 50-miler backpacking trips, week-long beach adventures, 50-miler canoeing, 100+ mile cycling trips, etc.  Now that I have pulled back a lot from the Troop, there is no one who is willing to put that much effort into the program.  So, the numbers are dwindling.

Agree with you wholeheartedly... young men want adventure, not academics.

Would making participation mandatory improve the program? 

18 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

@Tron, Since FOS has dried up, and only 1 unit in the district goes to the local summer camp, The "troop" is being charged $37.50 per Scout in addition to  $100 recharter fee. Next year it goes up to $75/Scout. That is in addition to the individual 's national registration fee, council service fee, and insurance fee. That is $120/Scout. So a family with 4 Scouts in the program costs $480 individual fees plus $150 for "Fair Share", plus unit dues. And that doesn't include camp outs and summer camps.

I know folks say scouting is cheap compared to sports, but there are a lot of folks who cannot afford to do sports, but could afford Scouting. Not any more. 

OMG, that's a recipe to kill scouting, not from cost, but from indignation. Let us just be real for a moment; a lot of us come out of the business world, we don't raise the price point of products unless there are no other choices. So many of us parents have been through restructuring and downsizing in the private sector, refusal to get operational costs down and instead passing the cost directly on to the consumer kills companies. 

[Tron]

On 12/12/2025 at 11:52 AM, Jameson76 said:

I do wonder what the "Actual" BSA National Numbers are at this point.  Nobody really knows.  Nobody knows where to get the information.  Most people have stopped asking.  Main success is judged by funds raised.  Most of our council staff is focused on getting cash, to support all the staff that is raising cash.

In our district we have and continue to lose troops and packs, but not sure there is any effort to save any of them or figure a way to stem the tide.  We have not witnessed an actual DE or other council staff in the wild in forever.  It's not that we have a bad relationship, that would infer our units actually knew who they were, we literally have no relationship.  There are maybe 20 units in the district (though I think less) and one would assume they may come by annually to see what's up.  

In the end BSA (sorry SA) will likely not end with a bang, it will just not be around the professionals that were supposed to be the managers and provide vision will go raise money elsewhere.

On 12/12/2025 at 12:39 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

 

Here is what I can see...

Post here if you want your specific council numbers, or I can see by state, also.  Also, if you want to know by program, sing out...

As of today, National level, all programs including Learning for Life, total youth registered is 877, 225.  Same month last year number was 986,520.

So, overall, drop is 109,295 Scouts, or 11.08% loss, from Dec 2024 to Dec 2025  I'll check these numbers again after 31 Dec, when many current registrations expire, and again after mid-March, when the 60 day grace period expires.

We are losing about 10% in our Troop, due to those turning 18.  Hope to gain those back during crossover season.

Please remind me

Last night I saw a dashboard and it had way different numbers. My understanding after asking some questions is that the numbers reported by councils and national in their annual reports Year-over-Year are not "current registered youth" and have not been "current registered youth". So we might have 877k right now but that number is not directly correlated to the membership numbers reported by national at the NAM. The number to compare against nationals year end number that they reported at the NAM is a "count of uniquely served youth in the previous calendar year" which currently stands at 1.2 million according to the dashboard I was shown last night. I am not sure if every council is doing the same thing or not; I suspect based on numbers I have seen that confused me in the past that my council is doing this as well. 

[Eagle94-A1]

1 minute ago, Tron said:

OMG, that's a recipe to kill scouting, not from cost, but from indignation. Let us just be real for a moment; a lot of us come out of the business world, we don't raise the price point of products unless there are no other choices. So many of us parents have been through restructuring and downsizing in the private sector, refusal to get operational costs down and instead passing the cost directly on to the consumer kills companies. 

Trust me there is a lot of indignation. One unit now refuses to have anything to do with the council except paperwork: no camporees, no using camp, no purchasing supplies, no FOS, nothing at at. Most of the units do not use the local summer camp because the program sucks: it is a MB giveaway. Last time I went, inadequate supplies, equipment breaking, large Scout to Instructor ratios (30 people in Lifesaving MB; 15 minutes max on the water each day because you don't have enough canoes?!?!?!), and no improvements from complaints.

Families are seeing all this and no longer want to support the council. There is actually discussion about the county leaving the current council, and joining a neighboring one.

 

[Eagle94-A1]

15 minutes ago, Tron said:

Last night I saw a dashboard and it had way different numbers. My understanding after asking some questions is that the numbers reported by councils and national in their annual reports Year-over-Year are not "current registered youth" and have not been "current registered youth". So we might have 877k right now but that number is not directly correlated to the membership numbers reported by national at the NAM. The number to compare against nationals year end number that they reported at the NAM is a "count of uniquely served youth in the previous calendar year" which currently stands at 1.2 million according to the dashboard I was shown last night. I am not sure if every council is doing the same thing or not; I suspect based on numbers I have seen that confused me in the past that my council is doing this as well. 

I do not know about today, but I know about back in the day. The #1 membership stat was the December 31st number. That was the one used in reports, media, etc. It is also the reason why a lot of councils had recharter December; delinquent units are still on the rolls until February or March. Rational was that paperwork was a pain, and it can take that long to get things fixed.

The #2 stat was the June 30th number. That was used to set goals, see how much work will need to be done in Round Up, etc.

Finally you had a monthly stat, and that compared to  the previous years monthly stat.

That is why you can see different numbers supposedly covering the same thing. While some will say it is "apples to apples," It is more like Granny Smith Apples to Gala Apples to Red Delicious Apples.

[InquisitiveScouter]

 

2 hours ago, Tron said:

Last night I saw a dashboard and it had way different numbers. My understanding after asking some questions is that the numbers reported by councils and national in their annual reports Year-over-Year are not "current registered youth" and have not been "current registered youth". So we might have 877k right now but that number is not directly correlated to the membership numbers reported by national at the NAM. The number to compare against nationals year end number that they reported at the NAM is a "count of uniquely served youth in the previous calendar year" which currently stands at 1.2 million according to the dashboard I was shown last night. I am not sure if every council is doing the same thing or not; I suspect based on numbers I have seen that confused me in the past that my council is doing this as well. 

I'd be interested to know the source...

I pulled raw numbers from the Council Membership Tool on my.scouting.  See attached for today's report on 092, Atlanta Area Council, which @Jameson76 had asked for.

So, over five days, the current numbers changed to 15341, up from 15315 last Friday (+26).  You'll notice the Dec 2024 number does not change (nor should it).

The number this will be on 31 Dec, as @Eagle94-A1 points out, will be the one to watch for to give the most accurate "real time" number for comparison. Although, I suppose if a Registrar has a backlog of applications or renewals, they can tweak the Dec 2025 numbers into Jan 2026.

 

 

On 12/12/2025 at 4:55 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

Dec 2024: 17277  Dec 2025: 15315   -11.36%

 

Edited 1 hour ago by InquisitiveScouter

[InquisitiveScouter]

On 12/12/2025 at 1:39 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

 

Here is what I can see...

Post here if you want your specific council numbers, or I can see by state, also.  Also, if you want to know by program, sing out...

As of today, National level, all programs including Learning for Life, total youth registered is 877, 225.  Same month last year number was 986,520.

So, overall, drop is 109,295 Scouts, or 11.08% loss, from Dec 2024 to Dec 2025  I'll check these numbers again after 31 Dec, when many current registrations expire, and again after mid-March, when the 60 day grace period expires.

We are losing about 10% in our Troop, due to those turning 18.  Hope to gain those back during crossover season.

Please remind me

And the aggregate of all councils today is 881,444.  A change of +4219 nationally... just in 5 days.  Registrars are busy at work 😜